Opposition to smart meters

Smart meters are one piece of creating a "smarter" electricity grid, and provide more detailed information about demand and allow for timeshifting demand to periods of more ample supply, etc. According to the Los Angeles Times, in "Opponents of PG&E 'smart meters' stand firm," opposition to smart meters is present in California and Maine over concern about electromagnetic radiation.

From the article:

The meters transmit data about electrical use over wireless networks to the utility company, enabling it to assess power demands and make adjustments to prevent blackouts, and giving consumers real-time data to help them reduce consumption. They are an integral part of efforts to create a "smart grid" nationwide that uses electricity more efficiently and can better accommodate alternative energy sources.

Nonetheless, finishing the installation in California won't be easy. The new meters have galvanized an unusual alliance of environmentalists, city planners, private land owners and politically conservative activists worried about the health effects, accuracy and privacy of smart meters, as well as jurisdictional conflicts with PG&E.

The "tea party" recently hosted a gathering of smart-meter opponents in Santa Barbara.

Protesters also gathered this month in Sacramento and at PG&E's San Francisco headquarters. Joshua Hart, director of a group called Stop Smart Meters!, said participants included "people with heartbreaking personal stories to tell about sleeping in the parking lots of churches and department stores to escape the bursts of electromagnetic radiation that have made them ill and fearful."

Chattanooga Tennessee by the way is the first U.S. community to have a program to install smart meters uniformly across the utility district. (It also comes with broadband computer service.)

In a recent issue of the New Yorker, there is a fascinating story about mental illness, deinstitutionalization, and the inability to deal with people who do not acknowledge mental illness (25% of people in jail or prison have mental illness), the lack of adequate community care, and how some people "can't be helped" and die as a result.

In the same issue, seemingly unrelated, is a book review of a book on the history of vaccination including the opposition to vaccination in some quarters (some people say that autism is a result of vaccination, etc.), that this opposition has been present since the beginning of the development of vaccination programs out of a sense that people shouldn't be forced to do anything, and that how small numbers of people can still be safe without being vaccinated because of the "herd reservoir" effect that most people have been vaccinated, but that if this number increases only slightly, the prospect for reviving epidemics increases.

It strikes me that opposition to smart meters comes out of the same kind of thinking about individuality and the power to stay apart (seemingly). It's interesting because people become very selective about the type of government power and services that they are okay with or willing to consume--you don't see many people repudiating the value of the street network...

It's as if the more knowledge we have, the less we are willing to use it.

University campuses, college students and community organizing

Greater Greater Washington has been running pieces relevant to the master plan update processes for both Georgetown University and American University and I have to say that some of the descriptions of what is going on makes me sympathetic to the university master planners.

I have to admit that I have a bias about universities and neighborhood communities that somewhat favors the university. I went to the University of Michigan, and the city in which it is located, Ann Arbor, grew up around the university--at least in terms of central campus--so the community and university are better integrated than many, although there is no question that the campus is still distinct and set off. And yes, I lived in various houses in the so called student ghettos south and west of the campus (I never managed to live in a house north of E. Huron Street though).

Universities can be key economic engines in a community, although we have to admit there are costs.

For example, there is no question that the Foggy Bottom area has been for the most part subsumed into George Washington University. And when Georgetown University students and, admittedly, other younger people, but Georgetown U is blamed, leaving Georgetown's "nightlife establishments" after last call (2 or 3 am) on a Friday or Saturday night make a hell of a lot of noise, and do disturb the peace and quiet that residents of million dollar homes normally expect.

Typically, university master planning efforts are quiet affairs--a bunch of consultants doing a study and plan, with interaction with university staffers, and maybe with some public meetings, but not usually--until the plan is released, and then, if public approval processes are in place, the back and forth and outcry begins.

I don't think that's a very useful process.

In most places, university master planning processes tend to not be too public because universities are either private schools or state government entities, which often makes the institution exempt from local law. In DC that isn't the case, universities have to update their campus plan every ten years and there is a public hearing process.

1. Universities in DC need to open up their master planning process somewhat to include a series of public meetings dealing with substantive issues.

It might not bring about consensus, but having a more public process before it goes to the level of hearings would make it somewhat easier to address the various issues and plan more collectively.

2. I think universities and the city could do a much better job engaging each other in an ongoing basis. Note that some cities, Philadelphia and Baltimore (Baltimore Collegetown Network) in particular, have active programs that work to leverage the economic potential of college students as a creative force in the local economy.

Much of the interaction that comes down from a university is more about managing public relations. Much of the interaction that comes up from a neighborhood is about protecting the neighborhood from property degradation, etc., mostly from students and off campus retail and nightlife.

DC is unusual because its universities are bordered by very successful and in-demand neighborhoods. That isn't the case in places like Philadelphia (Penn), New Haven (Yale), and many other places. Years ago, Penn considered moving out of Philadelphia, because of crime and other issues. Instead, because moving the university was impractical, they realized that they needed to refocus their attention on connecting to and working to revitalize the neighborhood outside of the campus. In DC, universities are seen more as an imposition, at least today.

Next month, the International Town Gown Association has its annual meeting. The Lincoln Land Institute has an ongoing effort ("Universities as Developers," University Real Estate Development, presentation, "From Enclave to Urban Institution: The University, the City and Land")) that brings together universities dealing with land use issues that impact local communities (e.g., how the University of Connecticut at Storrs is building a "town center" or Ohio State University's High Street neighborhood revitalization project, or Mercer University in Macon's program of improving what had been declining neighborhoods surrounding the school). There is also a university network of urban institutions, the Coalition of Urban and Metropolitan Universities, and it is telling that almost no DC-based institutions are members except for UDC--and none of the city's institutions have decent urban studies programs.

When I was involved in the Brookland Main Street program--both Catholic University and Trinity University DC are based there, as well as some religious colleges and Howard University is very close by--I wanted to organize a mini-conference on "town-gown" relations and land use planning, but I only had that job for about a year, and doing something like that takes more than one year to organize.

3. The Boston Globe has a bunch of articles including "Bonded by friendship, pair seek to build student ties" about how college student government presidents in Boston came together and created the "Boston Council of Undergraduate Student Presidents."

While this organization was more about the student government presidents reaching out to each other in terms of dealing with their universities, I think that such an organization could begin to build capacity and advocacy capability amongst students in terms of community issues that impact their quality of life as students.

The thing that makes achieving much success on the part of students difficult is that (1) students turn over every four years making the maintenance of change efforts difficult; (2) graduate students stay longer but are primarily at school to get an advanced degree; and (3) learning what you need to know to deal with local issues takes awhile, and students tend to not get interested in this til their junior year anyway.

In a place like Ann Arbor (and by extension Berkeley, Cambridge, and Madison) student organizing is aided by the fact that many people come to the community for school but never leave, get involved in local politics, etc., and these former students maintain communication and other networks which current students can join and participate in and learn from, and in turn, the former students provide advice, technical support, etc., as well, allowing organizing efforts to be maintained over a period longer than a typical 4 year college career.

Building these kinds of connections, organizations, and capacity building and technical assistance opportunities is likely essential to making it easier for these various constituencies and stakeholders "to get along" and more importantly, work together.

That's the next step I think, if we want the university master planning process to work better for universities, residents, and the city overall, and to be better able to leverage the economic power of universities in neighborhood improvement, such as with Howard University and lower Georgia Avenue and U Street, or Catholic University and the Brookland commercial district.

(For years, I have suggested that Catholic U move their college bookstore to the neighboring commercial district, in the way that many universities are doing, ranging from Pratt Institute in Brooklyn, Penn in Philadelphia, to Johns Hopkins in Baltimore and the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia--even the University of Baltimore has relocated their college bookstore to a mixed use building, making it more accessible to non-students in the broader community surrounding the campus.)

Report Ranks States Most Vulnerable to Rising Gas Prices, Offers Solutions

NRDC Press Release

Better Transportation Policies Key to Reducing Dependence on Oil

Rising gas prices are hitting drivers all across the country, but states with smart transportation policies can help their drivers feel less pain at the pump, according to a new report released today by the Natural Resources Defense Council.

In the 2011 edition of "Fighting Oil Addiction: Ranking States' Gasoline Price Vulnerability and Solutions for Change," NRDC and David Gardiner & Associates analyze state policies that help drivers, including tele-commuting options, transit spending, efforts to reduce sprawl, and other options.

"There is no immediate solution to high gas prices, but smart transportation polices can reduce gas bills for all drivers, no matter where they live," said Deron Lovaas, NRDC's federal transportation policy director. "Better state policies that give residents transportation options, such as transit assistance and telecommuting options, can provide relief. Federal action -- such as increasing vehicle fuel efficiency standards to 60 miles per gallon -- would reduce oil price vulnerability across the board. We know we can't drill our way toward lower gas prices, so policies like these deliver."

According to the report, the 10 states that are doing the most to promote clean energy technologies and reduce their dependence on oil are: #1 California, #2 Oregon, #3 Massachusetts, #4 New York , #5 New Jersey, #6 Maryland, #7 Connecticut, #8 Rhode Island, #9 Washington, #10 Vermont. ...

Regardless of how urban or rural the state, transportation is something everyone needs," said Elizabeth Hogan, an analyst at David Gardiner and Associates and co-author of the report. "Many of the states where drivers are paying the most at the pump are the states offering drivers the least policy relief. Looking at all of the options available to state policymakers, it's clear which states are taking advantage of all the opportunities available to them."

The report recommends that states establish policies that reduce sprawl, reduce the number of miles that citizens need to travel in vehicles to get to work or school or other daily tasks, and promote accessible public transit systems.

On the federal level, the report also recommends stronger investment in public transportation and in the maintenance and repair of decaying infrastructure, as well as establishment of a national oil-savings objective.

----------
Note that while I criticized somewhat the recent Brookings Institution report on transit access, its conclusions dovetail with this report, although more focused on metropolitan areas, and their need to coordinate land use and transportation planning policies to reduce sprawl. Also see the Neil Peirce column, "Public Transit, Access to Jobs: Escaping Our “Exit Ramp” Economy," which extends this point.

Urban Current blog of the Urban and Regional Policy Programme of the German Marshall Fund of the United States

From email:

The Urban Current is the blog of the German Marshall Fund's Urban and Regional Policy program, which fosters exchange on innovative policy strategies and shared challenges between urban and regional policymakers in the United States and Europe.

It has an international focus. Current pieces are on Lyon, France and branding, Germany's declining rural areas (technically not an urban issue, but inextricably linked), and the state of high speed rail in California.

Misplaced priorities: threatening Walmart if they don't open another store

(Photo by Marvin Lee.)

Today's Post tells us in "Gray to Wal-Mart: It’s all or nothing," that Mayor Vincent Gray threatens to deny Walmart stores building permits--not because two, maybe three of the projects, have significant problems in terms of how the sites will be developed, the lack of transportation capacity to serve the stores, and whether or not Walmart is committed to developing urban-appropriate operations and customer service practices--but because four Walmart stores aren't enough for Washington, DC, he wants Walmart to open a fifth store, in the Skyland Shopping Center in Ward 7. All or nothing...

From the article:

D.C. Mayor Vincent C. Gray delivered an ultimatum in a face-to-face meeting with Wal-Mart officials at a real estate convention here Monday: If the chain wants to enter the District at all, it had better commit to opening at Skyland Shopping Center, the long-delayed redevelopment project in Gray’s home ward that he considers the most important development project in the city. ...

“They’re interested in developing four stores,” the mayor said in an interview after the meeting. “All of us said, ‘What about a fifth store?’ They hemmed and hawed, and it ultimately came down to — you have a choice. You can do five stores or you can do no stores.”

Wal-Mart does not require major zoning changes or subsidies to open any of its first four stores, but two are on publicly owned land, giving the city a measure of control. Gray indicated he would be willing to go so far as to nix the company’s requests for building permits on privately owned sites, even for neighborhoods where residents favored Wal-Mart’s opening.

Wow.

Talk about focusing on what's important to the city's quality of life--not transportation, not urban design, not mixed use development in commercial districts, not mitigation of evident problems in advance of the opening of the stores--but that the city needs to see a commitment for a fifth store in the city, five or nothing!

Anyway, the Mayor has no legal standing to deny those permits. Land use regulations are a quasi-judicial process. If you meet the legal conditions, you get the permits. If you meet the legal conditions and don't get the permits, you sue, and eventually you win because it's a denial of due process and a violation of the Constitution.

I guess puffery makes elected officials feel important. But the misplaced priorities really suck. And in the end, if and when the boast doesn't come through, doesn't it make the person look foolish? Of course, maybe no one remembers.

Affordable housing vs. supportive housing

From David Smith of Recap Real Estate Advisors (David publishes an e-letter on housing issues, particularly the financing of affordable housing, and is the founder of the Affordable Housing Institute):

Who 'deserves' affordable housing? We justify it in public-policy terms as a haven out of poverty, and yet some people's poverty is more than just monetary, their personal self-sufficiency impaired by unwise life choices, unlucky circumstances, or just a bad roll of the genetic dice. To become more independent, these folks need customized life-skills services delivered in the home, the growing subset of affordable housing known as Supportive Housing. For owners, coordinating these new on-site activities with the routines of normal leasing, management and administration requires newly defined roles and rules of engagement, as explored in this month's State of the Market 38: The Push for Supportive Housing. It begins:

As affordable rental housing resources become more scarce, the market share of them devoted to Supportive Housing (SH) is climbing, as government increasingly pursues homeless-prevention and homeless-mitigation strategies that emphasize permanent housing and community-based solutions, placing ever more responsibility on private actors.

Given the financial incentives, many affordable housing providers are migrating into supportive housing, which is nudging them beyond basic real estate and into new, more service-intensive businesses.

You'll have to write him to get the e-letter.

Anyway, this idea of support systems is one that I extend to other areas, such as civic engagement capacity building, commercial district revitalization, especially the fostering of independent businesses, and the take up of sustainable transportation modes such as biking, walking, and transit.

One way in which community planning is completely backwards

I hate to be put in the position of agreeing with Washington Examiner editorial writer Barbara Hollingsworth, of whom I normally have the tendency to excoriate, but her piece, "Fairfax school officials to review closing Clifton Elementary," on the closure of Clifton Elementary School, a community school serving a rural section of Fairfax County, illustrates a problem that we have in cities also, when decisions to close schools based on enrollment levels or the cost to rehabilitate the school end up having devastating impacts on the quality of neighborhood-community life. (Also see this article about the school from 2010, "Parents, officials 'appalled' at decision to close Clifton school.")

This morning's Washington Post also has a long piece on Clifton School, "Closure shuts many doors ," focusing on the community-connectedness, volunteerism, and involvement of the community within the school and outside of the school deriving in part from the way that the school knits the community together.

I joke sometimes that "offices of planning" aren't really planning offices, but "offices of land use" or even "offices of land use development" because so much of the "planning" done by the other government agencies isn't coordinated by the office of planning and/or never comes before the office for substantive comment.

A key example is schools planning, which for the most part, is the domain of the local public school system, with limited input from other agencies, including the office of planning.

As far as delivering educational programs that's fine. (Well, it isn't, but that's another story.)

But the problem is the disconnect between the reality that schools, especially elementary schools, are a basic building block and foundation of quality neighborhoods and local community.

Schools are the fulcrum of community activity in so many places, and provide the means for people to meet and interact within communities outside of strict propinquity--meaning you have a chance to meet and become friends with a wide variety of people, not just the people you live next door to or across the street from.

Just like I believe that transportation planning needs to be done at two levels: (1) at the metropolitan level, setting requirements for network breadth and depth, level of service standards for the network and specific services; and (2) at the level of transit operations; schools planning in terms of providing a base level of "coverage" and neighborhood strengthening qualities and programs should not solely be the domain of the school system, the community's land use, neighborhood, and economic development planning initiatives need to take the lead on this so that all neighborhoods are served by at least one quality public school.

But in my neighborhood, which is gaining households with children, I don't know any families that send their children to the local elementary school, which is five blocks away. Mostly, their children go to charter schools or private day care. Although I guess people with children (and the people who live next door to them) end up meeting other families with children throughout the neighborhood because when they are out walking with their children, the kids end up being a "social bridge" that ease the process of meeting and making others' acquaintance.

In Baltimore County, the school system and the parks and recreation department have had for at least 50 years a memorandum of understanding about joint use of public school facilities for recreation programs.

In practice, that means that schools are used for more hours of the day and that the County doesn't need two different buildings to serve different functions. At the same time, certain school facilities such as gyms and auditoriums may be "overbuilt" so that they also can handle larger community functions, but that the money to pay for this comes in part from the Department of Recreation and Parks.

This idea needs to be extended so that a base number of schools are designated as what we might call "neighborhood foundation" schools, and the resources provided to the school would be funded in part for neighborhood stabilization and resident attraction and marketing purposes, meaning that some funds to maintain the schools in such places would come from outside of the budget of the school system.

Fixing the quality of the education program that is delivered is another question, one that I have written about plenty over the years.

Wall Street Journal's special section on transportation

-- Tomorrow's Transport

There are a number of articles on a number of topics including funding, freight, electric car charging, monorails, bus rapid transit, and air travel.

Earlier in the week, Notions Capital called our attention to this section's article entitled "Move It! ," which is a great piece by the Brookings Institution's Robert Puentes, based on the realization that while the US spends $170 billion/year on transportation, we don't spend it that wisely, we don't dedicate funding to a set of priority projects--including maintenance, because we don't have adequate "master" transportation plans at the national, state, and local levels.

Puentes discusses areas where US transportation can be significantly improved, based on the idea of congestion reduction and the economic and environmental costs of congestion:

• boosting exports and the quality of cross-border transportation connections;
• environmental impacts, especially air quality, of current mobility practices;
• innovations that if implemented can speed traffic;
• making it easier for people to get to and from work;
• better funding methods, such as a National Infrastructure Bank to fund projects (which would mean that municipalities don't have to sell their souls to private financiers for deals that aren't favorable).

Crying wolf in DC and California

Last week, the Los Angeles Times had an op-ed, "Business and employment: A 'job killers' list disproved," about how businesses often claim, in the starkest and hoariest terms, that X or Y law or regulation is a job killer, will destroy businesses, etc., but the reality is far different. From the piece:

Since 2003, the California Chamber of Commerce has published an annual hit list of bills it labels job killers. The list has included state legislation to protect consumers, workers and the environment, and to raise revenue to fund public services or support middle- and working-class families. ...

The chamber's argument is always the same: If "job-killer proposal X" passes, companies will go bankrupt, shrink or move out of California. Excessive taxes, regulations and paperwork, especially on small businesses, will crush private sector investment.

If all this sounds familiar, it's because business lobbies have made these claims every time California has increased the minimum wage; every time businesses have had to disclose or limit toxic material in workplaces, consumer products and communities; every time California's wealthiest or most profitable corporations have been asked to pay their fair share of taxes; and every time legislators and voters have taken action to limit greenhouse gas emissions. ...

But if we look backward, we find that the job-killer predictions are often wrong. Despite the chamber's political clout, some of the bills on its lists became law. So it is possible to evaluate whether the organization was providing honest analyses or crying wolf and engaging in scare tactics. ...

The chamber continues to promote its job killer list, despite the fact that its dire warnings of economic doom have been consistently wrong. And it does so despite the fact that Californians broadly support laws and protections that have made our air cleaner, our workplaces safer and our families more secure. Businesses do well when workers do well. That's what makes for a healthy economy.

Nonprofit arts organizations are making similar claims with regard to a proposed tax on admissions tickets to nonprofit events, according to "D.C. sales tax extension strikes a sour note>" from the Washington Times. From the article:

Should the theater tax become law, the “ripple effect would be quite profound,” far outweighing its estimated $2.3 million in additional tax revenue for the city, says Linda Levy Grossman, president of the Helen Hayes awards. Now-thriving areas such as the Penn Quarter arts and entertainment district would be especially hard hit, with its restaurants, shops and parking garages emptying as arts patrons stay home or take their business outside the city.

Any special interest is likely to cry wolf, to argue that they are exceptional and therefore deserve special treatment. It's not usually the case that this is true and I doubt that it would be the case for arts events in DC either.

Wegmans stores all look the same (of course, it's what the store offers inside that attracts customers)

Hunt Valley Maryland, photo by Amy Lunday.


Leesburg, Virginia. Photo from Loudouni


Liverpool, New York. Photo by Dick Blume, Syracuse Post-Standard.

Also see this past blog entry by Kaid Benfield in the NRDC Switchboard blog, "Great for Prince George's to (finally) get a Wegmans. But . . ." which makes the point that communities shouldn't measure themselves solely in terms of their shopping options, and the retail chains that open stores in their communities.


Wegmans from somewhere--look at all that parking, from the Kaid Benfield blog entry.

Brookings responds to criticism of their access to transit study

Last week, the Brookings Institution published a report, Missed Opportunity: Transit and Jobs in Metropolitan America, that was widely publicized in the media. Nate Silver of the 538 blog wrote some criticism of it, which was published in his blog on the New York Times website. I wrote about it on Sunday.

Two of the report’s authors, Alan Berube and Rob Puentes, responded, in the entry "Maintenance of Silver's Transit Line" (which I have to say is a forced joke-type headline referring to the development of the so-called Silver Line subway service in Fairfax and Loudoun Counties in Northern Virginia).

From the entry:

Silver’s central criticism seems to be that ranking cities’ transit systems based on how many people have access to transit, and how many jobs transit can deliver potential commuters to, ignores a much larger, more important question--is transit a better commuting option than driving a car? He probes the latest Census Bureau data to show that relatively few workers commute via transit in some of the highest-ranking metro areas on our list. How good can these systems be, he asks, if no one is getting out of their cars to use them?

We agree that this is not a great way to rank transit systems … but our report didn’t rank transit systems. It ranked metropolitan areas on how well their households and jobs were connected via transit.

It's true that this is an important distinction. I'm not sure that a lot of the press coverage of the study made this distinction. Plus, while I think these are important factors to compile and compare:

• the percentage of a region's jobs that are reachable via transit within 90 minutes;
• the percentage of working-age residents living near a transit stop;
• the average wait time for a bus during rush hour;

what also matters is what percentage of people actually use transit and why or why not. As I mentioned in the entry, what this ends up being is more of a measure of relative compactness of a region.

Although it would be useful to study sub-districts within regions and determine why people use transit or not. But we already do this (they are called "transportation analysis zones") and we know why this is so: the nature of the routes; distance to work from home; dispersal-deconcentration of jobs within a region; and lack of relatively direct transit vehicle routing (most regional transit systems key on the center city, whereas jobs have become much more dispersed within a region and increasingly located farther and farther from the core).

The big problem is that the more that places are dispersed (polycentric land use) the less possible it is for transit to service these areas efficiently, because transit service is best provided when serving relatively compact (monocentric) places (which is the basis of the arguments laid out in Belmont's Cities in Full).

What we need to be doing is changing our land use planning paradigm, to link land use decision making with transportation planning and capacity of existing infrastructure. That makes transit more efficient and effective, albeit less comfortable because it serves more people (e.g., San Francisco's MUNI system).

The more we put high traffic generating uses in places where cars are the most likely to be used mobility option, the more that the network is stressed.

The suggestion of putting a Wegmans on Georgia Avenue NW, in an area without subway service (although the Takoma Metro is about 1 mile away), for a use that is likely to generate mostly car trips--although it wouldn't if it were placed at a Metro station, complemented by the provision of delivery services--is a perfect example of how not to do land use planning.

Tall buildings

Tall buildings in Downtown Pittsburgh

It's always weird to go to other cities and see tall buildings, because DC's central business district does not have tall buildings.

Freight delivery management as part of urban transportation demand management

CVS pharmacy delivery truck during rush hour, Downtown Pittsburgh.

Why companies like CVS have a tendency to receive their deliveries during afternoon rush hour (I see this all the time in DC) is beyond me. They should be required to shift their deliveries to overnight hours, when the road network, both on the freeways and in urban centers, tends to be empty.

Part of a panel sign promoting the International Parking Institute

This is one of the associations serving the parking industry, both off-street, often privately owned facilities, as well as the on-street parking "industry" which is usually controlled by local governments.

There are some pretty amazing systems out there, fully integrating parking payment systems, space availability information for both the managers and potential users (through mobile phone apps, etc.), and enforcement management including a real-time listing of all occupied spaces where time has expired, that works on Ipads and other devices. Some parking meter kiosks will even accept payments for fines!

Another thing I learned is that the move from single space meters to multispace meters results in an immediate 30% to 40% increase in revenue.

Didn't have time to go to any sessions, but there are/were some good ones (hopefully I'll get around to purchasing CDs of those sessions).

Save our Heritage license plate, State of Pennsylvania

Historical interpretation sign, Allegheny County Courthouse & Jail, Pittsburgh

This interpretation sign is quite fabulous.

DC is turning me into a nimby

Hey, today I spent the day at the International Parking Institute conference, and I might get involved in the Green Parking Council, all for my business--who would have thought that would ever be something I'd get involved in, working with "the man", etc.? (It happens to be relevant to bike parking.)

Yet today's Examiner reports in "D.C. wooing Wegmans for Walter Reed development," that some obviously insane DC government officials are approaching Wegmans, Target and other large customer generating retail operations, to get them to consider locating stores at the soon to be redeveloped Walter Reed site.

From the article:

Keith Sellars, senior vice president of development and retail for the Washington DC Economic Partnership, said city officials have been courting Wegmans ``for years`` but never had a site large enough. ``Now we have a site we believe will accommodate them at Walter Reed,`` he said. ``This is the most real opportunity for them to enter the market.``

The city announced in March that it will have 61 acres of the property included the campus` entire Georgia Avenue frontage, once the army hospital moves out, doubling its initial share of the prime retail corridor.

Hey, I'd love to be able to bike to a Wegmans... but I can't imagine how having Walmart, Wegmans and other large retailers within 1 mile of each other, on a relatively narrow roadway, one that is already carrying 25,000 vehicles/day (and granted it could carry more) WITHOUT EASY ACCESS TO A SUBWAY STATION, except through shuttle services--could possibly handle another 24,000/trips/day.

This makes the last section of the "Square 2986 Large Tract Review Committee's" report on the possible Walmart store all the more relevant:

Identified Gaps in Planning and Zoning Regulations

The need for more robust planning and zoning regulations was made evident to the committee throughout the consideration of the development proposal for Square 2986. Each recommendation is deserving of a separate and longer write up, which is beyond the scope of this report.

Recommendations for rectifying gaps in Planning and Zoning regulations

1. The Large Tract Review process does not adequately address potentially negative economic impact of projects generally. The LTR process is also deficient because it is essentially advisory, without the ability to directly mandate action or deny approval. These defects in the Large Tract Review process should be addressed and the process made more robust.

2. DC should create a new mandatory review process (“Large Retail Impact Review”) to address the various economic and other impacts of large scale retail projects in excess of 75,000 square feet.

3. Arguably, the Georgia Avenue site on Square 2986 does not have the capacity to meet the demands of uses generating great numbers of automobile trips, and therefore high traffic generating uses should not be able to be located there. Land use and building use approval processes should include provisions for linking use approvals to sites with the capacity to satisfy transportation demand to a great extant through the use of already extant transportation infrastructure. The “ABC” planning process employed in the Netherlands is a model for how this could be done in practice.

4. DC does not impose impact fees on new developments. Suburban jurisdictions, including Montgomery County, do impose such fees. Collection of such monies would provide another method to address mitigation of project impacts, including the cost of rectifying the impact of new projects on “downline” infrastructure.

------
Probably a Wegmans would make more sense at the McMillan Reservoir site, being served by North Capitol Street, and to some extent Irving Street (although Michigan Avenue is closer, but not really capable of supporting much in the way of additional traffic).

Post editorializes against taxi medallions

I've written about the proposal to create a taxi medallion system in DC, which appears to be nothing but a form of politically-aided rent seeking designed to reduce competition. The Post has an editorial about this today, "Taxi trouble in the District."

From the article:

LAST YEAR, ANALYSTS for D.C. Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Natwar M. Gandhi undertook a study of how taxicab medallions have worked in other cities. Here’s what they found: windfall profits for a small group of people; an overall decline in service with longer waits and higher fares; and a system open to corruption. The report has been largely overlooked; its harsh findings should serve as a cautionary tale for city officials contemplating bringing a medallion system to the District.

To repeat: If DC had a master transportation plan, it would be easier to deal with this and other transportation issues. The Transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan doesn't even mention taxis once.

Hopefully this bill will die. But it will still take some time before manipulating the levers of local government--contracting, licensing, etc.--for profits becomes less fashionable among the local political and economic elites. (Also see "Window into political culture of illegal deals " from the Washington Post about the pay-to-play scandal in Prince George's County, Maryland.)

Some of the political class is opining that the great thing about the personnel hiring "problems" faced by people surrounding the Gray Administration, not to mention the scandals with CM Thomas and his unregistered nonprofit seeking donations and the financial problems and car-greed by Council Chairman Brown is that this will allow Mayor Gray to cut his coat tails and be rid of the hangers on and move forward.

I don't know if that will really happen (I think Mayor Gray is very smart but I wonder if he is too much a product of the same general political class that it's impossible to extricate himself from it), but it's nice to dream.

Councilmember Wells takes on the third rail of local politics: residential parking permit fees

Photo: 3rd Street NW, across from the back side of Coolidge High School. Yesterday there was a track meet there, and some residents clearly were concerned about people parking in front of their houses.

Most of DC's "new" "performance" parking policies focus on charging people more money for parking cars--unles they are a resident and have a residential parking permit. If you have a residential parking permit, the cost is $15/year, for access to spaces worth thousands of dollars.

The city has proposed a modest increase in charges, from $15 to $35 for the first car in a household, $50 for the second car and $100 for each additional vehicle. See the op-ed by Councilmember Wells "A win-win approach to parking " from today's Post. From the article:

Washington confronts a serious residential parking problem. Fortunately for us, charging higher fees for residential parking permit stickers, as I have proposed, can go far toward resolving it — and help us build a more livable and walkable city.

In many neighborhoods, there is not enough parking for every household to use even one space on the street. Yet data show that some households park five, six, seven and even more cars on residential streets. ...

However, sticker rates at $50 or $100 a year would still be far lower than the cost for comparable uses of public space. Consider how much it would cost to get a permit to use a residential parking area for a year for a dumpster ($1,675), a moving container ($3,650), or a moving truck ($18,250). And you can go to Craigslist today and find alley parking spaces advertised for $250 a month — $3,000 a year!

We'll see if it passes. People have a hard time being objective about their entitlement. (Also see "Fraudulent use of disabled parking placards explodes in last decade" from the Los Angeles Times, about how free parking permits are abused by fully-abled people using other people's parking permits to save money. There is a crackdown and misused permits are being seized.)

Meanwhile the transit system charges $200/year for a bike locker.

-----
If DC had a master transportation plan, it would be easier to deal with this and other issues.

The weird findings on transit from the recent Brookings Institution

Last week, the Brookings Institution released a study on transit, Missed Opportunity: Transit and Jobs in Metropolitan America, that seemed really weird, because the rankings seemed wildly disconnected from reality on the ground, based on use. It's like that study of sustainability that always ranks the Baltimore region higher than the DC region, even though DC's transit is 9 times superior (ranked by the number of people using rail transit in the DC region vs. the Baltimore region, according to statistics compiled by the American Public Transportation Association).

How could Honolulu be ranked #1, when the bus system carries about 223,000 riders/day?


New York Times graphic.

I think it was because the study was more about ranking a community-metropolitan area's relative compactness--it compared metropolitan areas in determining how effectively transit systems connect people with jobs, by measuring the proximity of transit stops to working age adults. Also see "Study finds pluses in D.C. public transit" from the Washington Post.

But as Nate Silver says in "On the Economics of Mass Transit and the Value of Common Sense" in the New York Times, the study doesn't get at the fact that riding transit vs. choosing other forms of mobility such as driving depends on the characteristics of the trip, choosing presumably the most efficient mode depending on cost, time, convenience.

As a result, the study's data seems wildly out of sorts compared to reality.

As a result, the study ends up not being very helpful in terms of supporting the case for transit, when the places that do better in terms of ridership and economic benefits and therefore are national models for demonstrating how to integrate multiple transit modes into their communities in ways that support compact development, infill development, and urban revitalization--such as Portland Oregon--end up being graded less well compared to Modesto, California (see "'#12 Transit'? TriMet, Portland area ranking in Brookings study not on board with bus ads" from the Portland Oregonian).

For another perspective, see "10 Best Cities for Public Transportation" from US News & World Report. In that study, the DC region is 11th and Portland fifth (AND DENVER is #1!?????), although the mode split for sustainable mobility--the percentage of the local population using walking, biking, or transit to get to work--between the two cities is more than 100% higher in DC's favor compared to Portland and not quite 400% higher for DC compared to Denver (although this data is only for work trips).

A good post with useful data comparison tables is Transport Politic's entry from last fall, "Transit Mode Share Trends Looking Steady; Rail Appears to Encourage Non-Automobile Commutes." I think the sub-head of that post, "rail appears to encourage non-automobile commutes," is a very important statement that makes the point that for "choice riders," if you want to encourage transit vs. driving, rail-based transit options are superior.

Note that I am not trying to make the case that DC transit is better than Portland's, but that how a metropolitan area is organized, the relative concentration of major employment centers, the monocentricity vs. polycentricity of the transit system and the region, and other factors make the difference in terms of usage--whether or not transit is an efficient way to get around compared to other modes.

Basically it comes down to where you live vs. where you work, go to school, shop, and play and whether or not transit (or biking or walking) is an efficient way to get there.

Image simulation, streetcar, Georgia Avenue NW

A designer who wishes to remain anonymous created this quick and dirty image simulation of streetcar service on Georgia Avenue. This is at the New Hampshire Avenue intersection, with the Park Place Apartments in the background.

It is quick and dirty (I "commissioned" it last night and got it today and have to turn it in with the full document tomorrow). We know that the tracks wouldn't be placed in the middle of the street, with grass, but we used this photo of the DC streetcar being tested in Ostrava, Czech Republic, where it was manufactured, and married the photo to one of mine of Georgia Avenue.

Image by Michal Rusek.

It doesn't show wires either, not because we are with the Committee of 100 camp about not have overhead wires for streetcars, but because I needed the image by tomorrow, to submit with the Large Tract Review Subcommittee of the ANC4B Square 2986 Committee, which was convened to consider the proposed Walmart on Georgia Avenue, and to make recommendations to the ANC concerning the review process for this project.

Because it's a "matter of right" project because it conforms to the allowable zoning already existing for the site, there is limited opportunity to weigh in on the proposal.

Much of the report focuses on site plan and whether or not it conforms to the intent of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, opportunities to implement best practice transportation demand management programming to reduce car trips to and from the site and to mitigate potential problems from increased truck traffic, and broader transportation planning and engineering questions triggered by the project, such as the need to reconfigure the Georgia Avenue-Missouri Avenue intersection, as well as to address the impact not just of this development, but of development that will come to the Walter Reed site, and why not use streetcar service as a way to mitigate traffic impact, hence the photo simulation.

Georgia Avenue-Missouri Avenue intersection, looking southeast from the northeast corner at Missouri Avenue. The intersection is offset, in an S configuration, with a rising grade up to Georgia Avenue from Missouri both eastbound, west of Georgia, and westbound, east of Georgia.

The final report, which is not quite 14,000 words, with 37 recommendations, will be submitted on Monday. I'm not sure how the ANC is going to submit the report, either with or without revision, as part of their overall submission. The document will be made available on the LTR subcommittee website, which I will write about it when it's put up (probably Tuesday).

Secularism

A few weeks ago I got into an argument on a local schools e-list, because I took offense to the characterization offered by many that the quality of public K-12 education began its long sad decline as a result of the banning of school prayer. One person took the opportunity and excoriated my "secular humanism."

For a variety of reasons, I was not systematically exposed to religion until I was about 12 years old. As a result, it was hard to take on faith, "faith," and I am not religious, somewhere between agnostic and atheist, although I happen to like religious architecture.

But because I am not religious doesn't mean that I am unethical or immoral. If you read moral and cognitive development theory, it's quite clear that reasoning capabilities, ethics and concern for others don't have to be based upon religious beliefs.

In short, I don't expect that today is the beginning of the end of the world.

Speaking of unsatisfactory visitor experiences: the breakfast at Hotel Harrington sucks

Hotel Harrington depicted in a historic postcard.

After Bike to Work Day festivities ended I had to eat. (I didn't manage to score any food goodies other than some bananas and oranges. By not getting to the line early, I missed out on coffee and bagels. Note to organizers, a two-sided line would go a lot faster.)

There are few options and as we were riding past the Hotel Harrington, a banner promotes their buffet breakfast. We had it. It sucked. (The bread was good.) It was $11. It included coffee and juice, but for the most part the food wasn't very good.

Since the restaurants there mostly cater to people who never come back, they don't have to focus on providing quality eats. (I haven't been there for lunch or dinner, maybe it's better.) I know that the Hotel itself is respected as a good quality comfortable relatively inexpensive place to stay in Downtown Washington.

I don't know how to do it, but the city "destination marketing organization" (the local convention and visitors bureau, here called Destination DC) ought to do "mystery shopper" visits to places like this and with the results, encourage the owners and operators to do a better job--these are the experiences that many people take away with them when they visit the city.

We ought to do better by our visitors.

Bike sharing...

A Cabi bicycle sharing bike, North Capitol and Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC

Undermaintained sidewalk area, Union Station area, median, Massachusetts Avenue at 1st Street NE

This has been a problem for at least 10 years. I remember talking to Rachel MacCleery, then the Ward 5 transportation planner, around 2003. She said it would be taken care of in the Union Station intermodal planning process...

What does this say about how much we value our public realm and providing a high quality experience to people who come to visit Washington?

Park and Shop ad, Washington Star, 4/10/1968

Thanks to The Brightwoodian for the scan.

I have mentioned that in the past, many downtowns, including DC's, had shared parking programs marketing short term parking to support retail shopping. This is another ad I came across after I scored a couple of post-riot Washington Stars at an estate sale. (Sadly, in the morass of the attic, I couldn't find the papers from April 6th, 7th, and 8th. One of those issues, the front page photos are all of H Street NE.)

A comment on the decline of newspapers?

Newspaper vending rack on Independence Avenue SW.

DC Water Authority good idea: free water bottle refills

DC Water and Sewer Authority which as rebranded itself as DC Water with a pretty good brand-logo (press release), has worked it out with a variety of stores and restaurants that people can go in and fill their water bottles for free, rather than (1) buy water and (2) get a bottle with purchased water that is likely to not be recycled.

Pretty cool.

National Main Street conference starts tomorrow in Des Moines Iowa

Streetscape, Ames, Iowa. Photo: Iowa Main Street program.

It can be expensive when you pay for it yourself, but I highly recommend if you can manage to do so, attending national conferences such as the National Main Street conference, the National Trust for Historic Preservation (this year it's in Buffalo, NY from October 19th-22nd), state preservation conferences, or the American Planning Association and American Society of Landscape Architects (this year it's in San Diego, from October 30th to November 2nd) conferences. All of these conferences move to places around the country, so they come past you at some point, regardless of where you live.

You get an opportunity to learn a lot very quickly, both through conference sessions and tours. It's always good to see other places and learn from them. I don't think I've ever been on a "bad" tour, but I have been on some that were much better than others because the tour leaders were so well organized. It's a struggle to balance tours and missing sessions. Best is a mix of both.

In fact I have been thinking about Houma, Louisiana this week, because that was one of the places I visited as part of a tour of the Atchafalaya National Heritage Area, as part of my attending the Main Street conference in 2006 in New Orleans, and Houma is one of the cities that may be flooded out by the diversion of the Mississippi River into the Atchafalaya River flood plain. (I remember the flood wall, and visiting the second floor loft of the people who owned the store beneath it...)

Anyway, this year the National Main Street Conference is in Des Moines, Iowa, starting tomorrow and going through May 25th. Des Moines was chosen because the city “exemplifies a modern city that has incorporated historic preservation into its downtown development efforts.”

For the most part, historic preservation based efforts are the only sustainable strategy for neighborhood and downtown revitalization programs, which is something you get a handle on by attending these conferences in different cities around the country. (Main Street programs tend to operate in smaller places, including neighborhood commercial districts, while "business improvement districts" tend to operate in larger cities, including downtowns--for example, DC has a number of BIDs across the city, as well as Main Street programs. So does Baltimore. NYC has many BIDs and no Main Street programs. Boston has more Main Street programs than any other U.S. city. San Diego has both BIDs and Main Street programs, but a number of the BIDs use the Main Street model to organize their efforts.)

Apparently, one key factor in Des Moines' success is a number of pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods close to downtown, including the historic East Village neighborhood at the foot of the Iowa State Capitol, and Sherman Hill, a neighborhood of Victorian homes, as well the addition of housing opportunities downtown proper.

Substance Architecture designed the Jirsa Loft in downtown Des Moines, Iowa. This 2,700 square foot loft apartment in downtown Des Moines was designed for a single doctor interested in fine art and urban living. For more see "the entry from the Karmatrendz blog.

This is important if you want to attract and retain residents--having historic building stock dominated neighborhoods close to downtowns makes walkability key because most cities don't have fixed rail transit service, they rely on bus-based transit service which isn't attractive to most demographics other than the transit-dependent.

Like all of the Main Street conferences, it will be a mix of programs and tours of bigger cities like Des Moines, college towns including Ames, home of the Iowa State University, and smaller towns. Tours outside the capital city include Mason City, home to the only remaining hotel designed by Frank Lloyd Wright; and Marshalltown, where visitors can see the more than $50 million investment in its downtown, which includes a LEED-certified library, Carnegie building and the recently re-opened Orpheum Theater Center.

Opheum Theater Center, Marshalltown, Iowa. Photo: Iowa Main Street.

Unfortunately, there is a sense within the Main Street movement that programs in big cities can't learn from small towns. I have always that that was a very narrow-minded belief. For one, a commercial district revitalization program doesn't cover an entire city, but a district or neighborhood, and at that scale, most places function similarly. There might be more poverty, crime, or ethnic and racial diversity in a big city, but otherwise the places can be compared.

In fact, some of the best lessons I have received about how to approach revitalization have come from small places, such as Littleton, NH, Libertyville, IL and the experiences of running programs across the State of Kentucky in large and small towns as synthesized by the Kentucky Main Street program.

Iowa has 45 active Main Street Iowa communities and Main Street communities are always great places to live, do business and visit. Iowa’s program has a decidedly rural flavor, with the most small town programs of any state’s Main Street program. Iowa's state-wide Main Street program is celebrating its 25th anniversary this year, Iowa’s Main Street program is one of the country's longest-running state-level programs and has a very high retention rate. Iowa’s program has helped spur more than $1 billion in private investment in its 25-year history and created more than 10,700 jobs.

(DC keeps trying to defund its programs, and more than half of the original 12 programs have disbanded--one actually still operates, in Mount Pleasant, but without DC sanction, and the Main Street Takoma program designated by the State of Maryland also serves the DC part of Takoma.)

Outside the capital city, an educational tour is available in Mason City, home to the only remaining hotel designed by Frank Lloyd Wright. In Marshalltown, visitors can see the more than $50 million investment in its downtown, which includes a LEED-certified library, Carnegie building and the recently re-opened Orpheum Theater Center.

Conservation Montgomery Community Strolls & BikeDC

In my writings on walking and biking and sustainable transportation planning more generally, I argue that the next stage in planning is to drill down from community-wide plans, and provide integrated infrastructure and programming plans for sectors, districts, and neighborhoods, to help people make the transition from driving to more sustainable mobility practices, as I said in the WTOP-AM piece, "Riders and leaders working to increase cyclist safety," at last weekend's Montgomery County Bike Summit:

Richard Layman, director of business development for BicyclePASS (Parking and Sharing Solutions), explains, "We take for granted the many years it took us to build a system of roads, gas stations, restaurants and repair shops to support driving. We need to think of biking as a system and make that system work so that it's so easy for people that they don't have to think about it, they just do it."

Bike DC is a community group ride set for this Sunday, May 22nd, that covers DC and Arlington County Virginia. It's actually a bike ride on a larger scale than the kinds of community rides and walks I am thinking about, in terms of "drilling down" to the neighborhood level.

Conservation Montgomery, the parks and environment nonprofit in Montgomery County Maryland sponsors "community strolls" in various parks that get closer to providing walking programming at the neighborhood level, while also doing knowledge and capacity building and civic engagement development at the same time.

Here is their schedule for the summer:

Takoma Park Tree Stroll
TOMORROW, SATURDAY MAY 21
10:30 am -- meet at Takoma Park City Council Chambers, 7500 Maple Avenue

A walk around Takoma, led by the City Arborist, Todd Bolton. Along the walk he'll discuss the city's tree ordinance, the Community Forestry Program, the city's recent tree canopy report, and the city's designation as a Tree City USA municipality.

Parks and Playscapes
June 12th, Rachel Carson Conservation Park, 2pm - 4pm

Topics covered will include land conservation policies, family friendly land conservation, and playscapes.

Underground Railroad Experience Trail invasive plant removal volunteer work project.
July 9th, Northwest Branch headwaters, 16501 Norwood Road, Sandy Spring, MD, 9am-noon


Stroll from Rileys Lock to Swains Lock along the Potomac River
September 24th

Stroll through Wyngate Community in Bethesda, including the historic Shoemaker Cemetery
October 22nd

For example,

Nuisance property abatement strategies: demolition vs. security planning and management: example from Greenbelt

Franklin Park Apartments image from the owner. Improvements in public safety at the complex, located in Greenbelt, Maryland, now match the green, garden-like setting.

In 2005, I wrote a blog entry about dealing with nuisance properties--issues such as abandonment, litter, disorder, crime--through focused programs, including receivership. But all too often the kneejerk reaction is demolition/destruction of the property.

The entry was triggered by a Baltimore Sun article on the yanking of a certificate of occupancy for a multi-unit apartment that is the site of a great deal of disorder. Northwestern Police District Deputy Major Mary Ellerman is quoted as saying "The only way to rid this area of the problem is to demolish." (The article was titled "City targets landlord in new tack to rid apartments of drugs, guns" but is no longer available online.)

A press release about a focused interdiction and security effort at the Franklin Park Apartment complex in Greenbelt, Maryland ("Crime Declines 30 Percent at Franklin Park Apartment Community in MD Under New Ownership") discusses how new ownership and a commitment to the creation and execution of a robust security management plan has significantly reduced crime at a previously problem location in Prince George's County, Maryland. From the release:

“Fieldstone Properties and the Greenbelt Police Department share a robust partnership in providing a safe place to reside,” said Greenbelt Police Chief Jim Craze. “Overall crime at Franklin Park is down 11 percent in the first quarter of 2011, with a remarkable reduction of 50 percent in robbery. These reductions can be directly traced to the presence of a Community Policing Officer assigned full-time to the neighborhood, other directed patrols in the area, and diligent, proactive management of the property.”

“The future is bright.” Chief Craze added. “From every indication, further reductions can be expected.”

Tim White is the Community Policing Officer assigned full-time to Franklin Park. Fieldstone Properties has provided him with an office, direct access to its tenant database, and a golf cart for patrolling the 153-acre property. “The golf cart is so quiet that people don’t hear me coming,” he said. “Some people don’t like that.” Officer White provides tenants with his cell phone number, email address, and an anonymous tip line. Aiding Officer White’s work are new community-wide security improvements, including call boxes and security camera enhancements.

Franklin Park’s management has initiated leasing policies that include criminal background checks. As a result, tenants in more than 260 apartments have been evicted, and all tenants are now held responsible for the behavior of their visitors. “There’s a new sheriff in town,” said Debbie Dillon, Executive Vice President, Fieldstone Properties.

Some people might object to the criminal background checks and evictions, but that can be a key step into reducing systemic criminal activity. Management is about making hard choices and the right choices, and continued focus and vigilance.

This success story is a perfect example of abatement of nuisance properties through management and implementation of robust security plans, rather than demolition and the creation of vacant property.

Also see these stories from the Gazette about the property and the new ownership team, "Owner of Greenbelt complex seeks $15M for bridge to Metro" and "New owner hopes to improve Greenbelt apartment complex."

A lesson in the Bixi funding problem: free lunches aren't free (and shouldn't be underpriced)

The Montreal Gazette has a number of articles (editorial: "Rigorous oversight will help keep Bixi on course;" "City insists taxpayers will still come out ahead") about financing of the Bixi bicycle sharing organization, which comes in the form of a loan from the City of Montreal. Since I am involved in a business that works to sell bicycle sharing too, it would be easy for me to try to seize on this as an illustration of problems with that firm.

While there are problems (some of the conflicts of interest that have been disclosed, and the perennial problem of public-private partnerships doing things off the municipal books), for the most part I think the lessons are more intricate and aren't criticism of Bixi as a business or as a competitor:

1. It's very hard and expensive to develop new transportation technologies. Financing is necessary (unless you can miraculously bootstrap your business) and must be obtained from somewhere.

2. It's hard to obtain investment/have the private sector do the development if the ability to profit from these technologies is questionable. Therefore, government funding is usually needed if you want to do the program.

But government funding of innovation--except for big projects like Airbus, military equipment, DARPA type stuff--is almost impossible to obtain because it is beyond the ability of local governments to fund or conceptualize.

Plus, it's risky, and government is risk-averse. I joke that government officials have nightmares imagining stories about their projects as exposés on the front page of the local newspaper. Hence, it becomes easier to not even try. Look at the Dulles Airport subway station issue as but one example of this general problem.

The sad story of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania in another--their debacles of trying to create a wild west museum off the books by the mayor, plus problems with a waste-to-energy facility have driven the municipality to the point of default, except that the State of Pennsylvania has stepped in.

For example, the bicycle sharing systems originally developed in Europe were a form of bundling by billboard/outdoor media companies. In return for the privilege of selling advertising in public spaces, the outdoor media companies would provide street furniture such as bus shelters, kiosks, restrooms, and even, bike sharing systems.

But it wasn't a free lunch. They did it for the advertising money. Similarly, companies aren't doing long term lease deals for toll roads and such because they want to help municipalities out, it's because the terms are so favorable that they will make a lot of money. Cities only do it because they are desperate for funds.

3. The bike sharing systems in North America have a more difficult time launching or funding because most cities have already signed away the privilege of selling advertising in the public space, which could fund this kind of infrastructure, and most of the contracts don't have a provision requiring the vendor to allow the sales of advertising on bike sharing kiosks.

4. And that is irrespective of the cost of developing new infrastructure, even if it has been proven elsewhere. The business model of the Bixi system in Montreal presumes that it won't necessarily be self-funded through operations, instead it projected that revenues generated by selling the technology to other communities would help pay for the system deployed in Montreal.

5. Getting financing from a government agency for technology development is very difficult. It would be impossible I think for most any city in the U.S. to be able to fund the development of bike sharing technology in the way that the Bixi system has been developed in Montreal.

6. I think the lesson is (a.) that cities can't expect to get this stuff--bike sharing systems--for free even though many elected officials think so;

7. and that subscription costs for members at around $75 per year are probably too low.

In fact, this reminds me of the bankruptcy of the English Channel train-tunnel. Construction and financing costs were significantly higher than anticipated. The 100% privately financed system was supposed to cost $2.6 billion but ended up costing $4.65 billion.

But the Eurostar system has a much better chance on breaking even and generating revenues without subsidy compared to a community bike sharing system. After all, the cost of a round trip ticket bought far in advance is more than $100. First class tickets, and tickets not bought in advance cost much more.

Silver Line Metro expansion a classic example of the need to have true regional transportation planning

Yesterday's papers had more on the continuing story of the fallout over the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority's choice of a more expensive subway connection at Dulles Airport (see "Loudoun weighs pulling Dulles rail funds" from the Post).

The story discusses how some Loudoun County Supervisors are reconsidering their decision to participate in the expansion of the Metro heavy rail transit system (I won't call it a subway because out there it will be above-ground), because of the controversy over the additional costs for building a better station connection at the Dulles Airport.

From the article:

The 23-mile Metrorail extension to Route 772 in Loudoun is being built in two phases. Loudoun’s share of the estimated $3.5 billion second leg would rise to $300 million, officials said, based on an underground location for the Dulles stop. ...

The first phase, connecting to the existing system near East Falls Church and extending to Wiehle Avenue in Reston, is scheduled to open in 2013 with five stations and will cost $2.75 billion. The second phase is expected to have six stations, including the one at Dulles, and could open by 2016.

Fairfax County has committed to financing 16.1 percent of the rail project’s total cost; Loudoun is expected to pay 4.8 percent; and the airports authority would finance 4.1 percent. The rest of the project would be paid for with state and federal funds and with revenues from the Dulles Toll Road.

4.8% of the total cost is $300 million. Arguably, Loudoun County will spur far more than that in new development and investment in the county, and reduce its reliance on automobile-centric mobility.

But the Airport connection raises another issue in terms of "who benefits?" vs. "who pays?" and should be considered more broadly. We shouldn't be too quick to condemn the shortsightedness of Loudoun County's elected officials, because they are pointing out a problem with the transportation planning and funding process.

1. We don't plan transportation infrastructure regionally, instead each of the jurisdictions does its own thing, and the various projects are cobbled together in the regional transportation planning and funding process, which is coordinated by the federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organization, which here is the Transportation Planning Board of the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments.

2. This includes transit planning. While WMATA was involved, the Silver Line was initiated by the State of Virginia.

3. So planning for the line reflected Virginia's preferences and didn't take into account other transit system needs, such as the need for an additional crossing over the Potomac River, and the desire to create a "separated blue line" serving Georgetown and other points in the city, and adding redundancy and capacity in the core of Washington, where capacity is expected to reach early next decade.

Washington Post graphic, 2001. Plans for the blue line extension were scuttled in 2003, although recent planning visions for the subway system have revived this idea.

4. On the other hand, having a rail connection to the region's major international airport is desirable not just for Fairfax and Loudoun Counties but for the entire region, and the argument could be made that making such a connection shouldn't only be the financial responsibility of those particular jurisdictions.

In fact I have argued that it is on this scale that the airport connection should be considered, and that the quality of the proposed connection and the alternatives should be compared to other international airports, and judged accordingly.

5. Although rather than make jurisdictions like DC or the State of Maryland pay into this expansion (although DC could have and should have if the Silver Line was used to create the separated blue line) for it, there ought to be an ability to have a surcharge on airline tickets for flights arriving and departing from Dulles Airport. EXCEPT that federal law doesn't allow it.

All this goes to show what a mish-mash transportation planning and infrastructure funding ends up being, and how it becomes an extreme disservice to the region.

True regional transportation planning would be the first step. Also see "Metropolitan Mass Transit Planning presentation."

Detroit as a "garden city"

Image: 1944 ad from the Bohn Aluminum and Brass Corporation, which was based in Detroit.

The major theories that drive land use planning are about 110 (Garden City, suburbanism, Howard) and 90 years old (Tower in the Park, Corbusier) respectively.

As someone who grew up in Detroit when I was young, the stories I read about how the city wants to convert itself into a big garden really saddens me. See "Imagining Detroit" from the New York Times. From the article:

Imagine blocks that once boasted 30 houses, now with three; imagine hundreds of such blocks. Imagine the green space created by the city’s heartbreaking but intelligent policy of removing burnt-out or fallen-down houses. Now look at the corner of one such street, where a young man who has used the city’s “adopt-a-lot” program (it costs nothing) to establish an orchard, a garden and a would-be community center on three lots, one with a standing house. (The land, like many of the gardens, belongs to the city and is “leased” for a year at a time. But no one seems especially concerned about the city repossessing.) A young man who adopts eight lots and has bought another three has an operation that grows every year and trains eager young people. A Capuchin monastery operates gardens spanning 24 lots, five of which they own; at one of them, I meet Patrick Crouch, who’s supervising 10 gardeners-in-training and reminds me that “community gardens are not just about ‘gardens’ but ‘community.’”

The gardens are everywhere, and you almost can’t drive anywhere without seeing one — a corporation named Compuware is establishing one downtown — but it goes beyond that.

Detroit was once the manufacturer for the world--and while motor vehicles were central, sure, it wasn't just motor vehicles. Detroit's manufacturers were key to the victory over Nazism in World War II.

If anything communicates how the creation of a global economy has led to the decline of US manufacturing, it is making over Detroit into a big market garden. I guess it takes recycling and "adaptive reuse" to a new level.

Urban composting

Metrocurean has an article, "Composting in the City? Yes, You Can!," about a DC composting service, Compost Cab, that charges $8/week to pick up your stuff, or $2 to drop it off at the Dupont Farmers Market.

The City of Seattle started composting throiugh their trash pick up program in 1989, although they didn't start including food waste until 2005. Montreal does it too. The Lower East Side Ecology Center in Manhattan takes compostable materials at the Union Square Greenmarket. Other cities also have composting as part of their solid waste management and reduction policies, it is still a relatively new thing. From the Seattle Times article "Seattle piles on to its national leadership in composting":

Analysts at Seattle Public Utilities say Seattle residents are recycling food at 10 times the national average. They also say Seattle's compost rates climbed 47 percent between 2008 and 2009. ...

During 2009, Seattle Public Utilities measured 26,400 tons of food scraps collected from Seattle residents' homes, enough to make nearly 10,000 tons of compost. According to the utility, a Seattle family of four recycles about 220 pounds of food, which yields 80 pounds of compost.

The city has collected more compost each year since 2005, when it first began collecting food scraps. But the 2008 to 2009 increase is the largest.

Jenny Bagby from Seattle Public Utilities attributes the increase to two 2009 policy changes. Seattle Public Utilities switched from bi-weekly to weekly pickups for yard waste and food scraps while also allowing residents to place all food scraps in their yard-waste bins. Before the change, residents couldn't recycle foods like steak or eggs into their bins.

Half of Seattle's restaurants do commercial composting. See "New Seattle law will cook restaurant waste into compost" and "Food-waste composting: recycling's next frontier" from the Seattle Times. And San Francisco was ahead of Seattle on the food waste front.

One of the reasons that DC may not be motivated to be at the forefront of solid waste management and reduction policy and practice has to do with the fact that Fairfax County buys DC's trash to burn in a waste to energy plant.

In the DC region, Montgomery County is particularly active in promoting composting, and they compost yard waste (leaves, grass, etc.), but they don't pick up food scraps.